Just curious if there is any news at all about development by Sony for new lenses on their E mounts? I feel like now that the A7/A&r are out, all lens development will be centered around them.

And I only ask because, while I love my NEX6 and Zeiss 24mm, I'm really looking for a camera system with more lens options. Which is why I've been toying with the idea of selling my NEX6 and possibly moving to an Olympus E-M1. I'd really rather stick with the Sony but it's been awhile since E mount has seen a new lens and it's a little worrisome.

Should I hang in there with the Sony or should I switch to the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm Pro?

There won't be any more APS-C lenses because NEX is dead, or because Sony will only make full-frame lenses, or because Sony is going out of business, or something. Actually you should probably just give up photography altogether and start investing in a nice golf club system or something because we all know the camera market is on the rocks right now.

They didn't say that they would not release any APS-C lenses in the meantime.

Just like Sony never said they wouldn't make spaceships and unicorns, they never said they wouldn't make any APS-C lenses in the next few years. Companies are not in the habit of making press releases about stuff they will not due.

By this line of thinking, Nikon and Canon are going to stop releasing APS-C lenses as well. I see no APS-C roadmap or communication from either of them so they must be on the brink of shutting down all APS-C lens production and development!!!!

Good job at trolling the thread though:)

Why do you think Sony is saying that they will be releasing 10 more lenses for FE mount over the next 2 years? If you can't figure it out then there is no hope for you. How many A7/A7rs do you think they are going to sell if they do not make a statement as to showing that they plan on supporting the system with new lenses in the near future. They NEED to make that statement.

Just curious if there is any news at all about development by Sony for new lenses on their E mounts? I feel like now that the A7/A&r are out, all lens development will be centered around them.

And I only ask because, while I love my NEX6 and Zeiss 24mm, I'm really looking for a camera system with more lens options. Which is why I've been toying with the idea of selling my NEX6 and possibly moving to an Olympus E-M1. I'd really rather stick with the Sony but it's been awhile since E mount has seen a new lens and it's a little worrisome.

Should I hang in there with the Sony or should I switch to the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm Pro?

It is your call in the end....

I find the Nex-6 an excellent camera, and it is still my preferred camera. It is small (much smaller than the E-M1, which is A7 size, and price). It has professional aspirations (try using the HVL-F20M with the HVL-F43M as wireless flash, or use the dedicated video-mic).

The only thing that it lacks is the quick switch MF/AF button that the Nex-7 and the A7 have, but you can work around this in MF/DMF mode if you need it.

Lenses on the Nex-6 are excellent - plus it takes all legacy glass (especially RF) better than the Nex-7 (and perhaps A7) does.

IQ of the Nex-6 is better than the E-M1. I am sure this will get dragged into a side discussions, but I would not use the E-M1 at (true) ISO 1250 (about ISO 1600 on camera). The Nex-6 has more headroom. (let the trolls come again, each time).

Both are 16Mp, but if you crop (for web, monitor), the Nex-6 is a better format.

The Nex-6 plus E24Z is a killer combination. If you want more, you can opt for a (cheap) used Nex-7. No such upgrade exists for OM-D - keep this in mind. The E24Z is made for the Nex-7, and delivers 24Mp high IQ (similar to A7) - nothing that OM-D has compares to this.

If I were you, I would invest in one or two more lenses: do get the E35/1.8 OSS lens. It is my favorite on the Nex-6 and you will get very pleasing images with this lens.

For travel, I do like the E1650 kit lens (I assume that you have this one already), and for compactness, I like the E20 pancake lens.

Those four lenses (E24, E20, E1650, E35) make your Nex-6 a do-all camera. Only two lenses to consider are a wide (E1018) and long (E85, when announced). Sure, long reach (200mm) is not included, but do you shoot much like that? If so, the E18200 is a great add-on.

Consider adding these three lenses (E20, E1650, E35). It will cost much less than the E-M1, and hold its value longer. It will also give you much more versatility. Remember that the 12-40/2.8 on E-M1 corresponds to 16-52/4.0 on APS-C. If you really like the Oly lens, consider the E1670/4 OSS. These two lenses are about equivalent in price and performance, but the E1670 has longer reach, and is mated to a larger sensor (with more Mp if you do opt for a used Nex-7).

The E-mount series lenses are far from dead. They are an excellent set of lenses, and they take incredible images. Just because they have been out for a while does not mean that they are substandard: the Nex-7 is still the highest IQ APS-C camera of all times, the E35 is still one of THE best lenses compared for APS-C cameras.

Sony knows that they have a winner with the Nex camera concept, they will not walk away from it. Sure, the Nex name died, for Sony-internal reasons, but it changes nothing on the concept nor its abilities.

If not Nex, what else would you use?

I honestly believe that you will be disappointed if you go to a smaller sensor camera. But if you are attracted to 'ease-of-use', do consider the RX10 camera. It has a number of benefits if you do not need high ISO, and do a lot of outdoors shooting.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,Henry

I didn't realize there was a conversion with the lens when going from M4/3 to APS-C...in that regards then, as you mentioned, the f4 zooms are just on par if not better than the Olympus Brand which actually makes me extremely happy as I had said earlier I would very much like to stick with Sony. Another big issue with going to the E-M1 was that for the cost, I could get an A7 for just a little more and be able to swap and share lenses whenever I want.

So thank you very much for your detailed reply as that helped a LOT! I will admit that the X-T1 by Fujifilm still looks tempting BUT I think I will ultimately stick with the NEX6 as the Zeiss lenses are really nice (again I lOVE my Zeiss 24mm). I may however purchase a Fujifilm X100S that I've had my eye on for awhile and looks like a fun camera but my primary will be the NEX.

Since this is such a frequent topic, I am posting my spreadsheet of E mount lenses here. This includes FF, Cine and APS-C, prime and zoom. There is no shortage of lenses except for prime >60 in AF and zoom over 200mm.

Those four lenses (E24, E20, E1650, E35) make your Nex-6 a do-all camera. Only two lenses to consider are a wide (E1018) and long (E85, when announced). Sure, long reach (200mm) is not included, but do you shoot much like that? If so, the E18200 is a great add-on.

And there is the superb Sigma 60mm f/2.8 ... if you don't need really shallow DOF then it is a very decent portrait lens. Almost too sharp even at f/2.8. Got mine for 160 Euros.

Apparently not a very popular lens. Maybe because of the "slow" aperture?

I wonder where this "need" for fast portrait lenses comes from and who actually uses them ... you don't see too many "shallow DOF" portraits in this forum...

The fast 85 will be released as an FE lens (Sony did the same for A-mount), and fairly inexpensively.

You always say junk like it is real when it right now is only your dream. If you have a statement from Sony about the lens and its price, let us see it. If not, then stop making junk up.

All we know right now is Sony said they are making FE lenses. The have not announced any APS-C lenses. FE lenses average over $1000 each.

Just how many aliases are/were you using here?

Wait another two weeks, will'ya? More (APS-C) announcements to follow then.

And you better read up on Sony statement and announcements, I think that you way off base...

-- hide signature --

Cheers,Henry

If Sony does come out with a blended mediocre NEX-6/7 combo replacement, it's going to be tough on the APS-C segment. I think it would only make sense for them to push full frame and higher margins but Sony will have to release something special in APS-C format to keep it alive. Fingers crossed.

Consider the A7 body with the Nex-7 updated sensor. It will wipe the floor with the competition.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,Henry

The NEX-7 successor in A7 body is not what I'm looking for. If I wanted that style, I would probably go to Nikon. There are reasons NEX was so popular and the small RF style was one. You might as well go for the better AF and lens selection on Canikon APS if you want your camera to look like one.

If you believe the rumors, the 'A7-like' Nex-7 will include IBIS as well. That will turn some heads (and silence some claimants out here).

But I do agree with your statement - the RF style is a big winner for these cameras.

According to you:The FE lenses average $875 in price and that may go up with the next lens.The 70-200mm FE lens is LARGER than athe Canon FULL FRAME version in every dimension.There are no new APS lenses announced at this time, but Sony said they are work on more FULL FRAME lenses.

According to you, Nikon must be targeting fools with $1300 APSc lens (17-55/2.8)

Nikon makes cameras that focus correctly. If you watch the Super Bowl you saw hundreds of Nikon cameras and not a single Sony mirrorless, because Sony is that bad. Sony has dropped to the 5th best mirrorless focusing camera behind Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus.

, and m43 manufactureres with $1200-1600 lenses for the tiny format.

Who shoots 4x3 anymore? Sure their sensors are as good as the Sony APS-C if you crop to 4x3, but I never do.

I am glad that Sony would be focusing more on FF lenses.

Almost everyone who bought a $400 APS body is NOT happy about lenses costing $800-$1000. The majority don't want to manually focus and can buy a better Nikon with better lenses for less.

They didn't say that they would not release any APS-C lenses in the meantime.

Just like Sony never said they wouldn't make spaceships and unicorns, they never said they wouldn't make any APS-C lenses in the next few years. Companies are not in the habit of making press releases about stuff they will not due.

Those four lenses (E24, E20, E1650, E35) make your Nex-6 a do-all camera. Only two lenses to consider are a wide (E1018) and long (E85, when announced). Sure, long reach (200mm) is not included, but do you shoot much like that? If so, the E18200 is a great add-on.

And there is the superb Sigma 60mm f/2.8 ... if you don't need really shallow DOF then it is a very decent portrait lens. Almost too sharp even at f/2.8. Got mine for 160 Euros.

Apparently not a very popular lens. Maybe because of the "slow" aperture?

I wonder where this "need" for fast portrait lenses comes from and who actually uses them ... you don't see too many "shallow DOF" portraits in this forum...

I use Sigma 70/2.8 for portraits and it works. However, the idea of shallower DOF largely comes from classic portrait FL of 85mm which are typically f/1.4-f/2, occasionally f/2.8. But on APSc, the equivalence would be 57mm, f/1-f/1.8 (which is FE 55 territory). This FL is not used for tight portraits so control over DOF with larger aperture is greater. The Sigma 60/2.8 will struggle for longer portraits due to smaller aperture but will do fine when closer focus is used ( tighter composition).

According to you:The FE lenses average $875 in price and that may go up with the next lens.The 70-200mm FE lens is LARGER than athe Canon FULL FRAME version in every dimension.There are no new APS lenses announced at this time, but Sony said they are work on more FULL FRAME lenses.

According to you, Nikon must be targeting fools with $1300 APSc lens (17-55/2.8)

Nikon makes cameras that focus correctly. If you watch the Super Bowl you saw hundreds of Nikon cameras and not a single Sony mirrorless, because Sony is that bad. Sony has dropped to the 5th best mirrorless focusing camera behind Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus.

, and m43 manufactureres with $1200-1600 lenses for the tiny format.

Who shoots 4x3 anymore? Sure their sensors are as good as the Sony APS-C if you crop to 4x3, but I never do.

I am glad that Sony would be focusing more on FF lenses.

Almost everyone who bought a $400 APS body is NOT happy about lenses costing $800-$1000. The majority don't want to manually focus and can buy a better Nikon with better lenses for less.

Being smarter also entails understanding...That a mirrorless format has already has its advantages (I don't think pros were shooting with a D3200 either).And it would be dumb to spend more on bodies than on lenses.

Just a quick lesson on what being smarter entails. Now, I did leave out the point being discussed that tou "skipped"...

Does it take a dumb person to buy an APSc, much less a smaller format, lens that costs )1k or more? Or, would it be dumb to assume such position?

According to you:The FE lenses average $875 in price and that may go up with the next lens.The 70-200mm FE lens is LARGER than athe Canon FULL FRAME version in every dimension.There are no new APS lenses announced at this time, but Sony said they are work on more FULL FRAME lenses.

According to you, Nikon must be targeting fools with $1300 APSc lens (17-55/2.8)

Nikon makes cameras that focus correctly. If you watch the Super Bowl you saw hundreds of Nikon cameras and not a single Sony mirrorless, because Sony is that bad. Sony has dropped to the 5th best mirrorless focusing camera behind Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus.

, and m43 manufactureres with $1200-1600 lenses for the tiny format.

Who shoots 4x3 anymore? Sure their sensors are as good as the Sony APS-C if you crop to 4x3, but I never do.

I am glad that Sony would be focusing more on FF lenses.

Almost everyone who bought a $400 APS body is NOT happy about lenses costing $800-$1000. The majority don't want to manually focus and can buy a better Nikon with better lenses for less.

Being smarter also entails understanding... it would be dumb to spend more on bodies than on lenses.

So all those people who bought an A7R and old legacy lenses are "Dumb" now. I'll let them you you said so.

Does it take a dumb person to buy an APSc...

It is dumb for a person on a budget to buy an inexpensive APS body, but then find all the new lenses cost over $750. Sony doesn't have much for them and so they are going to Canon and Nikon which is why mirrorless sales fell so much and DSLR sales increased.

They didn't say that they would not release any APS-C lenses in the meantime.

Just like Sony never said they wouldn't make spaceships and unicorns, they never said they wouldn't make any APS-C lenses in the next few years. Companies are not in the habit of making press releases about stuff they will not due.

By this line of thinking, Nikon and Canon are going to stop releasing APS-C lenses as well.

Sigma and Tamron keep making them though. That 60mm F/2 macro is a must have lens. Think about all the APS lenses that Canon and Nikon already have and Sony users are still begging for.

The FE lenses average $875 in price and that may go up with the next lens.

take a reply out of its context,

LOL, first you say the average FE lens price is $875, and then try to say that was out of "context"???

Yes an average of $875 rather than "more than $1000" which you claimed. The context being lenses sofar (=available), which was pretty clear from the parts of the post that you purposedly keep removing.

The average price of the FE lenses is $875.

There is no FE 70-200 with a dollar pricetag to be had yet. Fact.

It will cost over $1000, right? Don't waffle like you do and have a backbone. What do you think the price will be? $1000? $1500?

I have no idea what it will cost exactly so I can't calculate an average without guessing, but I also know it's not available in the US plus I don't know when it will be. And since you made this about lenses sofar...

The 70-200mm FE lens is LARGER than athe Canon FULL FRAME version in every dimension.

And more of the same tactics. You mentioned both the Canon and Nikon being smaller.

And I was CORRECT. The Nikon is 78x178.5 and the Sony is 80x175. When you compute the volume the Nikon is smaller.

Bwahaha. Did you use a 3D rendering to calculate volume? Because without that using volume as an argument when maximum length and diameter are this close and the diameter not constant, is pointless.

You have never been about truth, that much has been clear and exposed in this forum for a long time.

They didn't say that they would not release any APS-C lenses in the meantime.

Just like Sony never said they wouldn't make spaceships and unicorns, they never said they wouldn't make any APS-C lenses in the next few years. Companies are not in the habit of making press releases about stuff they will not due.

According to you:The FE lenses average $875 in price and that may go up with the next lens.The 70-200mm FE lens is LARGER than athe Canon FULL FRAME version in every dimension.There are no new APS lenses announced at this time, but Sony said they are work on more FULL FRAME lenses.

According to you, Nikon must be targeting fools with $1300 APSc lens (17-55/2.8)

Nikon makes cameras that focus correctly. If you watch the Super Bowl you saw hundreds of Nikon cameras and not a single Sony mirrorless, because Sony is that bad. Sony has dropped to the 5th best mirrorless focusing camera behind Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus.

, and m43 manufactureres with $1200-1600 lenses for the tiny format.

Who shoots 4x3 anymore? Sure their sensors are as good as the Sony APS-C if you crop to 4x3, but I never do.

I am glad that Sony would be focusing more on FF lenses.

Almost everyone who bought a $400 APS body is NOT happy about lenses costing $800-$1000. The majority don't want to manually focus and can buy a better Nikon with better lenses for less.

Being smarter also entails understanding...it would be dumb to spend more on bodies than on lenses.

So all those people who bought an A7R and old legacy lenses are "Dumb" now. I'll let them you you said so.

Does it take a dumb person to buy an APSc...

It is dumb for a person on a budget to buy an inexpensive APS body, but then find all the new lenses cost over $750. Sony doesn't have much for them and so they are going to Canon and Nikon which is why mirrorless sales fell so much and DSLR sales increased.

19% market share for mirrorless over jan-dec 2013, just like in 2012. Shipment of mirrorless units fell by just 1.7% point more than DSLR year over year, on the other hand DSLR shipment value felll by 8.6% point more than mirrorless year over year. December shows mirrorless units fell by 0.7% compared to the same month in 2012, vs a 13.8% drop for DSLR's. Mirrorless value of shipments in december went up by 22.2% compared to 2012, DSLR's value went up by 11.8%.

Source: CIPA worldwide december 2013 figures, just made available on their website.

But yeah, show us some non relevant local sales increase from your favorite retailer.

Whatr do you mean with focus correctly? As far as I know all Sony cameras focus correctly, maybe not as fast as Nikon DSLRs but correctly.

If you watch the Super Bowl you saw hundreds of Nikon cameras and not a single Sony mirrorless, because Sony is that bad.

Did you look well at the superbowl? Did you see any Nikon camera in the $2000,-- range? Did you see any lens inr the pricerange under the $1000? Those professionals are using the cameras that are the best for the job. They don't care that they buy a camera and lenses that costs more then a very nice car, they need it for the job. A mirrorless camera (none of them) are good enough and have good enough lenses for uses as a professional sports camera.

So it is not that Sony is bad, it is that Nikon (and Canon) makes the camera and lenses and offers the support that a professional need. When you look at the normal people at sportfeilds where their kids are playing you will see many mirrorless cameras, including Sony, and they take excelent pictures with them, Sony is that good!

Sony has dropped to the 5th best mirrorless focusing camera behind Fuji, Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus.

But they are still the better selling then Nikon (very fast focussing), Panasonic (fast focussing), Canon (big brand, but bad mirrorless), Fuji (maybe fast focussing, we have to see how good it is in real life tests), and Sony is close to (and in some regions better selling then) Olympus. I don'tr count Pentax as it is to easy...

, and m43 manufactureres with $1200-1600 lenses for the tiny format.

Who shoots 4x3 anymore? Sure their sensors are as good as the Sony APS-C if you crop to 4x3, but I never do.

Well very many people shoot m43. They have great cameras, and they own the biggest part of the mirrorless market.

I am glad that Sony would be focusing more on FF lenses.

Almost everyone who bought a $400 APS body is NOT happy about lenses costing $800-$1000. The majority don't want to manually focus and can buy a better Nikon with better lenses for less.

First I have n A700 and a 70-40mm Gzoom lens, guess what was more expensive? It is very normal that people buy more expensive lenses then cameras. Some people are so smart, they buy the cheapest model camera, to save money for the most expensive lenses, as they know that the lens does more for the IQ then the camera...

Being smarter also entails understanding...it would be dumb to spend more on bodies than on lenses.

So all those people who bought an A7R and old legacy lenses are "Dumb" now. I'll let them you you said so.

First many of the legacy lenses people are using are more expensive then their cameras (look at the price of some of those nice Leica and Zeiss lenses, they are not cheap! It is not wise to put only low quality lenses on a high quality camera as you will not use the potential of the camera.

Does it take a dumb person to buy an APSc...

It is dumb for a person on a budget to buy an inexpensive APS body, but then find all the new lenses cost over $750. Sony doesn't have much for them and so they are going to Canon and Nikon which is why mirrorless sales fell so much and DSLR sales increased.

And now about the lenses. When someone is on a budget and buys a Sony APS camera, he can buy the very inexpensive Sigma lenses (the 19mm, 30mm and 60 mm all good lenses for the price) They can buy the Sony APS lenses, all are normal priced with exeption of the high quality Zeiss lenses. So they don't have to buy the FF lenses. For every FF lens out there is a APS lens with close to the same focal range, nobody tells them to buy the more expensive (but opticly better) ff lenses.

And as last: Sony will come with more affordable FE lenses too. They started the FE range with the best primes you can buy under the $1000! Other lenses with lesser quality will come to...